Table 4.

Effects of harrowing treatments on leaf cover, weed density and crop yield in experiments A and B.

Responses after harrowing
Harrowing treatment	rolling (passes)	Leaf coverns (%)	Weed density† (plants m−2)	Crop yieldns (t ha−1)
Experiment A
none	1	28.7	18.0 b	5.9
	2	27.7	27.2 b	6.4
	3	25.9	22.3 b	5.9
light	1	23.2	14.3 a	6.4
	2	21.9	12.7 a	6.3
	3	20.7	8.7 a	6.6
strong	1	22.7	11.8 a	6.8
	2	23.5	13.9 a	6.1
	3	22.5	8.1 a	6.4
strongest	1	21.3	7.1 a	6.5
	2	22.1	9.0 a	6.4
	3	22.6	8.8 a	6.8
varied	1	24.2	9.5 a	6.6
	2	23.0	7.8 a	6.7
	3	24.5	8.4 a	6.7
Experiment B
untreated	1	30.8	26 B	5.7
	2	28.0	28.5 B	6.7
	3	26.0	23.1 B	6.2
ISD	1	23.0	8.1 A	6.6
	2	24.3	8.4 A	6.8
	3	23.4	4.1 A	7.0
IWD	1	23.6	4.2 A	6.3
	2	25.4	6.3 A	6.9
	3	23.9	5.2 A	6.8
ISD + IWD	1	24.3	7.8 A	6.9
	2	23.5	6.1 A	6.8
	3	23.3	4.7 A	6.4

^nsnon-significant effects;

^†Tukey (HSD) ranking at α = 0.05, small letters for experiment A and capital letters for experiment B